In his November 2011 ruling, Rakoff, a U.S. District Court judge in Manhattan, criticized the settlement because it provided no “framework” for determining whether the penalty adequately addressed the allegations.

In addition, the judge took a dim view of the agreement because, like many civil settlements with the SEC, it allowed the defendant to pay a fine without admitting to any wrongdoing.

The appeals court ruled that Rakoff overstepped his authority by rejecting the deal based on his belief that the settlement didn't serve the public interest because it didn't include an admission of guilt.

Ian Bolland

A journalism graduate of Liverpool John Moores University. During his time at university, Ian spent time on work experience at local newspapers in Liverpool, Bolton and Wigan, and prior to that he did work for The Observer's 'fans verdict'. Ian also has interests in news, current affairs and business but mostly sport, including football, rugby league, cricket, golf and Formula 1, amongst others.